- Email: [email protected]
The relationship between type a, internality–externality, emotional distress and perceived health
\ PERGAMON
Personality and Individual Di}erences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
The relationship between type A\ internalityÐexternality\ emotional distress and perceived health B[ D[ Kirkcaldya\ \ C[ L Cooperb\ A[ F[ Furnhamc a
b
International Centre for the Study of Occupational and Mental Health\ Dusseldorf and Jena\ Germany Manchester School of Mana`ement\ University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technolo`y\ Manchester\ U[K[ c Business Psycholo`y Unit\ Department of Psycholo`y\ University Colle`e London\ U[K[ Received 29 June 0886
Abstract This study was based on 144 European managers| "German and British# responses to speci_c Occupational Stress Indicator scales "Cooper et al[\ 0877# and explored the impact of personality factors "Type A and locus of control# on subjectively perceived job stress\ satisfaction at work and physical and psychological health[ No signi_cant relationship was reported between personality\ work satisfaction and general health[ Overall\ Type A internals expressed the most job satisfaction with their work situation and better physical and psychological health\ although this was found signi_cant only for the sample of British managers[ Type A and B externals displayed higher mental illness scores\ whereas Type B externals only reported signi_cantly more physical symptoms "physical ill!health#[ Type B internals appear to report the best health[ Þ 0887 Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved[ Key words] Type A^ Locus of Control^ Health^ Stress
0[ Introduction Researchers have hypothesized a long list of individual di}erences and personality correlates of both occupational satisfaction and health "Kirkcaldy et al[\ 0882\ 0883^ Cooper and Payne\ 0880^ Burke\ 0877#[ It is generally assumed that these personality or cognitive traits moderate or mediate between occupational sources of stress and various job outcomes\ like satisfaction and health "Cooper\ 0885#[ This study set out to examine two moderator variables empirically] the Type A Behaviour
Corresponding author] Dr Bruce Kirkcaldy\ Psychological Institute\ Haydnstr[ 50\ 39482 Dusseldorf!Benrath\ Germany[ 9080Ð7758:87 ,*see front matter Þ 0887 Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved[ PII] S 9 0 8 0 Ð 7 7 5 8 " 8 7 # 9 9 9 3 6 Ð 5
113
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
Pattern and Locus of Control[ The concept of InternalÐExternal locus of control "LOC# owes its original conception to Rotter "0855#[ This theory asserts that individuals hold generalized expectancies\ based on past experience\ concerning the source of control of reinforcements in their environments[ These same individuals "internals# believe themselves responsible for and in control of\ their own destiny which can be in~uenced by their behaviour^ rewards are felt to be obtained through the exercise of personal e}ort and skills[ At the other extreme of this continuum are people who believe external factors\ such as fate\ luck or unpredictable events\ are beyond their own control and perceive little personal in~uence on the control of rewards and punishments[ The locus of control concept and measure has generated an enormous amount of interest "Furnham and Steele\ 0882# though there are those who have been critical of the internal:external distinction "O|Brien\ 0870#[ Type A behaviour has also witnessed much research in the _eld of clinical and health psychology[ For example\ working on the major determinants of heart attacks\ Friedman and Rosenman "0863# showed a signi_cant relationship between behavioural patterns of people and their prevalence to stress!related illness\ particular coronary heart disease[ They referred to this coronary!prone pattern as Type!A behaviour or {hurry sickness|[ It is characterized by a style of living which includes {extremes of competitiveness\ striving for achievement\ aggressiveness\ haste\ impatience\ restlessness\ explosiveness of speech\ tenseness of facial muscles and the feeling of being under pressure of time and under the challenge of responsibility|[ Like locus of control\ Type A is measured on a single dimension from Type B to Type A[ Research on the relationship between Type A and health\ speci_cally heart disease\ has been somewhat inconsistent "Shekelle et al[\ 0874#[ Several studies "Williams et al[\ 0879# have found that hostility\ a component of the Type A pattern\ is a better predictor of heart disease than measures of Type A[ Finally\ several studies "Barefoot et al[\ 0872# have demonstrated a strong relationship between hostility and death rates[ On the other hand\ Friedman and Booth!Kewley "0877# found that anxiety and depression were predictive of coronary heart disease "Kirkcaldy\ 0878#[ 0[0[ Type A\ job satisfaction and health There is a vast\ but equivocal literature in the Type A _eld looking at the relationship between this variable\ health and job satisfaction "Burke\ 0877^ Kirkcaldy and Cooper\ 0881^ Chesney and Rosenman\ 0879#[ There has been proli_c literature on the susceptibility to stress of Type As and concomitant illness "Heilbrum and Friedberg\ 0876^ Ward et al[\ 0875# as well as health[ Furnham "0872# found Type A had higher mental illness scores but more {internal| health locus of control belief than Type Bs[ Type As tended not to believe that their health was threatened and they had control over their health outcomes\ though the results did depend on the particular locus of control scale used[ Similarly\ Perlo} et al[ "0877# found Type As had higher internal health locus of control scales than Type Bs\ but Leikin "0889# failed to replicate this e}ect and argued that it is not belief about personal control that mediates in the di}erent health behaviours of As and Bs\ but rather the attributions they make to various symptoms[ Thus\ the literature on Type As and health is ambiguous "Kirkcaldy\ 0878#[ Many reports suggest that all Type As have poorer mental and physical health than Type Bs\ but results depend on the measures of both the independent and the dependent variables[
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
114
A number of articles have also looked at the relationship of Type A behaviour and job satis! faction\ though the results are also equivocal[ For instance\ Materson et al[ "0873# found no relationship between Type A scores and job satisfaction among sales personnel[ However\ Chusmir and Hood "0877# found that Type B behaviour was a signi_cant predictor of job satisfaction for both male and female working groups\ as did Kirkcaldy and Cooper "0881# in a study involving police managerial sta}[ Yet Howard et al[ "0866# assessed di}erences in overall satisfaction and found no relationship with Type A behaviour[ No doubt\ di}erent _ndings are due to the fact that studies are not strictly comparable in terms of subjects\ their jobs or\ indeed\ how Type A and job satisfaction is measured[ More importantly\ both concepts are multidimensional and it is quite possible that only some facets of job satisfaction are related to only some facets of Type A behaviour "e[g[ Satisfaction with {organizational processes| appears positively correlated with the cognitive components of Type A {attitude to living|\ the latter being less clearly related to sat! isfaction with {personal relationships| "Kirkcaldy et al[\ 0882#[ 0[1[ Locus of control\ job satisfaction Spector "0871#\ in a review article of the application of locus of control to organizational behaviour\ examined its relationship for such variables as satisfaction\ performance\ job perception\ motivational and supervisory style[ Internals generally display fewer psychological strains as a consequence of job speci_city and are less likely to respond to organizational frustration with aggression or withdrawal than are externals "Fusilier et al[\ 0876^ Storms and Spector\ 0875#[ Furnham and Drakeley "0882# found internals| locus of control was closely related to a positive perception of organizational climate\ particularly commitment and morale[ Spector "0871# found that internals are inclined to believe they may control work setting through their behaviour[ They are easier to motivate^ exhibit strong beliefs in their own competence^ perform better "as a result of greater e}ort\ seeking of more information in complex tasks and the exhibition of greater personal e}ectiveness#^ prefer a participative supervisory approach^ rely on personal persuasion from subordinates^ more task and less socially!oriented^ perceive less job strain^ exhibit more turnover in high dissatisfying jobs[ Externals tend to be more satis_ed with direct supervision^ show compliance with social demands and comply more with demands of coercive supervisors[ {{One further note is that internals seem to behave in ways that validate much theory in organizational psychology[ That is\ internals respond to reinforcement contingencies "incentive systems# on the job[ Externals on the other hand\ seem unresponsive to incentives "they want them but will not necessarily work hard for them# and prefer directive supervision[ Thus\ more organizational theory might well be limited to internals|| "p[ 384#[ In a very extensive review\ O|Brien "0870# tabulated and critically reviewed the extensive litera! ture on the relationship between locus of control beliefs and work[ Indeed he proposes four dimensions] internals "who believe in internal control across all situations#^ realists "whose beliefs vary as a function of the situation#^ structuralists "whose external belief stresses societal determinants of behaviour# and fatalists "who see all outcomes as dependent on luck\ fate and chance#[ Other reviewers have attested both to the popularity and the power of the locus of control concept but pointed out conceptual problems and measurement shortcomings "Furnham and Steele\ 0882#[
115
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
0[2[ A typology resulting from Type A and locus of control As shown above\ both Type A and locus of control have been shown to relate to occupational and health outcomes[ There is some evidence to suggest these variables are neither conceptually nor empirically overlapping[ Neither Frost and Wilson "0872#\ Feather and Volkmer "0877#\ Burke and Deszca "0871# nor Kirkcaldy and Cooper "0881# found the two measures correlated signi_cantly\ while Volkmer and Feather "0880# found locus of control to be signi_cantly positively correlated with some aspects of Type A "i[e[ achievement*striving#\ but negatively correlated with others "i[e[ impatience*irritability#[ Newton and Keenan "0889# looked at the moderating e}ects of both Type A and locus of control separately as predictors of job strain\ but neglected any study of their interaction[ There is some literature on the Type A behaviour and various aspects of control\ such as reaction to uncontrollable situations "Furnham et al[\ 0874#\ judgements of control "Strube et al[\ 0875# and perceived control "Perry and Tunna\ 0877#\ but less so on locus of control and Type A[ Over the years\ researchers have claimed that both the Type A "Spence et al[\ 0876# and the locus of control measures "Paulhus and Christie\ 0870# are multi!dimensional[ Thus\ Cooper et al[ "0877# adopted a 2!dimensional locus of control scale[ Friedman et al[ "0874# have distinguished between a healthy and unhealthy Type A and Type B[ Healthy As were talkative\ in control and charismatic\ unhealthy As repressed\ tense and illness!prone\ while healthy Bs were relaxed and quiet and unhealthy Bs submissive\ repressed and tense with external locus of control[ Although their 1×1 classi_cation was not based on locus of control beliefs\ the scale was used to validate the classi_cation[ This study is not an extension of the Friedman et al[ "0874# study\ which did not look at locus of control and Type A:B\ rather they examined expressiveness and Type A:B[ Expressiveness is a construct that has been shown to be unrelated "uncorrelated# with the locus of control[ "They may of course be parallel _ndings with the Friedman study if one assumes as did Friedman\ that Type A!externals are {healthy| as were Friedman|s Type A!expressive\ with Type B!internals:expressive being unhealthy[# Indeed\ the sort of methodology helps to unravel the many ambiguous _ndings in the Type A area[ This is not the _rst study to look at the interactive typology of the A:B behavioural pattern and locus of control[ Nowack and Sassenrath "0879# divided people into the four groups and looked at anxiety as the dependent variable[ As they predicted\ it was Type A\ external locus of control group who showed the highest test anxiety scores[ They believe it is the interaction of these two factors that is predictive of stress[ From the four!fold classi_cation of A:B and I:E quite clear types emerge "Kirkcaldy et al[\ 0882\ 0883#] "0# Type A externals] These are clearly deeply frustrated types\ because although competitive\ achievement!oriented\ aggressive and frenetic\ they believe this success is beyond their control^ either in the hands of fate or powerful others[ "1# Type A internals] Type A\ achievement orientation and competitiveness combined with intern! ality is likely to make these people relatively satis_ed*they believe that with e}ort and ability they can achieve what they want[ "2# Type B externals] These types are likely to feel rather helpless or hopeless\ and they are not competitive or achievement oriented\ possibly because they believe success in life is frequently a matter of chance or fate[
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
116
"3# Type B internals] These types are not particularly achievement oriented and striving\ yet have a strong feeling that they are in control in their lives[ As a result they are likely to be relaxed[ This typology does not attribute di}erent weights to the two variables] they contribute equally to the typology[ From the above typology several hypotheses were proposed[ First it was predicted that Type A internals would express least job stress\ most job satisfaction and report less psycho! logical and physical illness than the other three groups "particularly Type B externals#\ second it was predicted that Type A externals would experience most job stress\ least job satisfaction and report more illness\ ill!health with Type B internals having higher mental and physical health scores[
1[ Method 1[0[ Subjects The subjects used in the study were 144 managers from diverse British and German companies[ Two national groups were chosen to verify whether the e}ects were reproducible in di}erent countries[ The majority of the subjects were middle to senior managers[ There were 012 "37[13)# British and 021 "40[65)# German Ss[ The typical manager was likely to be of senior management\ male "76)#\ aged between 26 and 44 years "69)#\ married or in cohabitation "73)#\ with children "62)# and a university education "50)#[ 1[1[ Measures The Occupational Stress Indicator "OSI# "Cooper et al[\ 0877# was used\ which measured seven di}erent aspects of occupational stress[ This is a fairly well!known\ multi!dimensional\ self!report measure that attempts to measure not only sources or factors that lead to job stress but also job satisfaction and mental:physical health[ These subscales include three independent variable measures]Ð "a# sources of job stress "50 items#\ "b# Type A behaviour pattern "03 items#\ "c# locus of control "01 items#^ and three dependent variable measures\ "d# job satisfaction "11 items#\ "e# mental "07 items# and "f # physical health "01 items#[ Four of the OSI scales have subscales[ The sources of job stress is composed of six stress subscales] factors intrinsic to the job\ managerial role\ relationship with other people\ career and achievement\ organisational structure:climate and home] work interface^ high scores indicating high stress[ The Type A behaviour measure has three subscales and a total score^ they are {attitude to living|\ {style of behaviour| and {ambition|[ Note that this measure does not have an hostility subfactor[ In this study we used the total score because of the weaker internal reliability of the subscales[ High scores are classi_ed Type A\ low scores Type B[ The locus of control measure contains three subscales and a total score] {organizational forces|\ {management processes| and {individual in~uences| but the total score was used to codify the subject into internal or external[ The job satisfaction scale is composed of _ve subscales and a total score] {achievement value and growth|^ {the job itself|^ {organizational design and structure|^ {organization processes| and {personal relationships| "high scores indicate high satisfaction#[ The mental and physical health measures provide total scores only for each[ High scores indicate illness^
117
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
low scores health[ A detailed description of each of these subscales can be found in Cooper et al[ "0877#[ Reliability and normative data for the U[K[ is provided in Cooper et al[ "0877#\ with validity data in Robertson et al[ "0889# and Rees and Cooper "0880#[ The OSI was translated into German by a native speaking German psychologist and then back!translated into English by the _rst author[ Internal reliability coe.cients were computed for the six global scales "total job pressure\ Type A\ internal locus of control\ overall job satisfaction and health#[ For a German sample\ reliability coe.cients range from 9[49Ð9[89 "Kirkcaldy and Cooper\ 0881#\ with the mean reliability coe.cient for the scales being 9[62[ In addition\ demographic data was collected] gender\ age\ marital status\ number of children\ educational level\ and job tenure[ 1[2[ Procedure Ss completed the questionnaire in their own time and were not paid for participation but debriefed where possible and o}ered a free individualised case!report regarding their occupational stress pro_les "if requested#[ The British sample was drawn from managers attending management programmes at the Ashridge Management Centre\ U[K[ This pool of managers was drawn from a range of British companies at the upper middle to top management level\ as were the German managers "selected from management consultancy agencies\ management training centres and several large international _rms throughout Germany#[ These were a good representative sample of managers in the public and private sector and participants of the German equivalent of Ashridge GSW "Liblar#\ who run professional programmes for established managers[ The managers in the two countries were matched for age\ gender\ educational status and parenthood[
2[ Results 2[0[ Statistical analysis In order to analyse di}erences in stress pro_les between the distinct personality groups\ multiple discriminant analysis "MDA# was used[ A median!split was used to generate four groups\ per! formed for each nation separately\ apportioning subjects into one of four typologies[ Wilkinson "0877# describes classical discriminant function"s# as {{a special case of the general linear model\ this discriminant analysis treats it as a one!way multivariate analysis of variance||[ For instance\ in our study\ MDA was computed as a means of comparing the six stress subscales*or _ve job satisfaction subscales*simultaneously[ Such a multivariate technique possesses distinct advantages over reliance on an array of univariate analyses of each subscale:component[ It minimised the probability of making a type 0 error\ reducing multiple measures to a single major component\ by taking account of {{interrelationships between pro_le variables\ individual subject variance around group means on pro_le elements and group mean variability on the individual variables|| "Kroll and Crenshaw\ 0857#[ In addition to the pro_le multivariate statistic\ a series of univariate F!tests are computed for each of the subscales if the multivariate F was statistically signi_cant[
118
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
2[1[ National and demographic differences There were no national di}erences on either subscale or total score for Type A behaviour\ locus of control\ or physical health[ Germans reported slightly less job satisfaction on two of the _ve scales "job itself F 4[65\ P ³ 9[94 and organizational processes F 7[57\ P ³ 9[90#[ Also\ the German managers had healthier mental health scores[ Gender\ age\ educational level and job tenure di}erence were then examined across all subscales but multivariate "MANOVA# and univariate "ANOVA# analyses were non!signi_cant[ Although there were some signi_cant di}er! ences\ there were fewer than may be expected by chance\ hence these di}erences were not considered further[ 2[2[ Type A and locus of control Neither variable was related to the subjects| age\ education and gender[ In the German sample\ the two scales were marginally negatively correlated "r −9[00\ P ³ 9[94#\ while in the British the correlation was both positive and signi_cant "r 9[16\ P ³ 9[90#[ Thus\ it is externality and Type A that is positively correlated for the British samples\ but internality and Type A for the German sample[ When combined\ the correlation was near to zero "r 9[92#[ Table 1 also indicates the cell sizes for the four groups when both variables were split at the median\ the cell sizes were very even[ 2[3[ Type A:locus of control typology and job stress Any di}erences between the typology and both job satisfaction and health could easily be caused by di}erences in the experience of stress[ The OSI measures six job stressor factors and these were compared between the four di}erent types for each national groups[ Table 0 shows that no clear pattern emerged\ with only one of twelve separate factors being
Table 0 Means for sources of job stress and Type A:control typology British
German
Stress factor N
AE 15
AI 20
BE 24
BI 20
F Level
AE 20
AI 22
BE 23
BI 23
F Level
Intrinsic Managerial role Relationships Career Org structure Home:work
18[5 25[9 20[4 17[9 26[3 20[4
16[3 20[1 16[4 11[4 22[4 17[2
17[5 22[3 18[1 14[7 23[9 29[5
16[8 20[7 16[3 14[1 22[0 17[5
9[55 0[78 0[53 1[35 0[23 9[78
18[0 25[2 21[6 20[6 32[3 28[7
16[8 22[6 18[1 17[4 27[2 25[0
29[3 25[3 21[5 29[8 31[8 28[0
17[0 23[6 29[2 17[2 26[4 23[4
0[11 0[90 1[06 0[53 2[32 1[07
High scores indicate high stress[ P ³ 9[94[
129
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
Table 1 Means for job satisfaction and Type A:control typology British
German
Job satisfaction N
AE 15
AI 20
BE 24
BI 20
F Level
AE 20
AI 22
BE 23
BI 23
F Level
Achievement Job itself Org design Org processes Relationships
13[7 06[6 07[2 06[2 02[9
17[8 08[1 08[6 08[1 02[1
14[7 06[3 06[7 06[9 01[4
15[6 07[4 08[6 07[6 02[4
2[71 2[13 1[25 2[78 9[85
13[9 06[1 06[4 05[0 01[9
16[8 06[2 19[6 07[0 02[5
12[3 05[7 07[9 04[7 01[9
14[5 06[5 06[9 05[4 01[6
2[70 9[15 3[73 1[90 1[35
High scores indicate higher satisfaction[ P ³ 9[94^ P ³ 9[90[
signi_cant\ with the multivariate analysis being non!signi_cant "multivariate F 9[66 and F 0[93 for British and German samples respectively\ P × 9[94#[ Each MANOVA was across the four groups within country[ Hence the typology does not seem sensitive to job stress[ In other words\ di}erent types did not have di}erent levels of stress[ 2[4[ Typology and job satisfaction The overall multivariate analysis was statistically signi_cant "F"04\231# 1[56\ P ³ 9[90#[ A series of one!way ANOVA|s were then computed over the four types "for each culture#\ with job satisfaction[ Table 1 shows that for the British three of the _ve satisfaction factors with regards to {achieve! ment| "P ³ 9[90#\ {the job itself| "P ³ 9[94# and {organizational success| "P ³ 9[90# yielded sig! ni_cant di}erences[ The German data showed two signi_cant and one marginally signi_cant factor "{achievement| "P ³ 9[90# and {organizational design| "P ³ 9[90# and {personal relationships| "P ³ 9[09##[ Post hoc analyses\ however\ show a very clear pattern[ For each of the signi_cant factors that showed a signi_cant di}erence for both national groups\ the Type A internals expressed most satisfaction and the Type B externals least satisfaction[ This was equally true for the factors that reached a marginally signi_cant level or did not reach signi_cance[ 2[5[ Typology and health A one!way ANOVA was run\ across both national groups\ between the four types and mental and physical health "Table 2#[ For the British group only\ the various typologies signi_cantly predicted both health measures\ not only univariately but also multivariately F statistic "F"5\123# 2[08\ P ³ 9[90#[ For the sample of German managers\ the multivariate analysis of health pro_les was not signi_cant "F"5\141# 0[60\ P × 9[94#[ Post hoc analysis of variance showed both A and B externals appeared less mentally healthy than the internals\ particularly the type B internals[
120
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124 Table 2 Means of mental:physical health and Type A:control typology British
Mental health Physical health
German
AE
AI
BE
BI
F
AE
AI
BE
BI
F
45[1 12[9
37[7 17[9
43[5 29[3
32[3 13[9
4[79 2[45
36[8 29[4
31[7 15[3
37[4 17[4
31[8 14[0
1[53 1[91
High scores indicate illness^ low scores health[ P ³ 9[94^ P ³ 9[90[
3[ Discussion Following Kirkcaldy et al[ "0883# and Nowack and Sassenrath "0879#\ subjects from two cultural groups were ascribed into one of four categories depending on their Type A or locus of control scores[ Previous research would seem to indicate that Type A with external locus of control would be the most frustrated\ unhappy and poorly adapted "Kirkcaldy et al[ 0882\ 0883#[ Both variables "Type A and externality# individually appear to be related to work and life dissatisfaction and mental illness\ but in combination these e}ects are likely to be accentuated[ The results did\ indeed\ support this picture certainly with job satisfaction but not job stress[ It seems from the results that internality is most adaptive\ in that internal As had the lowest stress and highest job satisfaction scores\ while the internal Bs had the best psychological health scores[ The results may go some way to clarifying the equivocal Type A literature[ Many researchers have attempted to ascertain the unique characteristic in the Type A syndrome\ and many have been suggested\ such as hostility or desire for control "Strube et al[\ 0875#[ For instance\ in a study where they examined the 1×1 classi_cation in Types A and B individuals with high and low desire for control\ Lawler et al[ "0889# concluded] {{Desire for control is proposed as a coronary!prone component of the Type A behaviour pattern in women|| "p[ 024#[ This study suggests that it is not so much desire for control\ as locus of control\ which in interaction with other Type A characteristics may lead to frustration\ ill!health and unhappiness[ Whereas external locus of control beliefs seem associated with poor adaptation independent of whether associated with Type A or Type B\ internality in either type seems associated with good overall psychological adaptation[ Thus\ quoting from Friedman et al[ "0874#\ it seems that internal Type As are healthy {charismatic| types who are expressive\ dominant\ fast!moving but in control\ coping well\ sociable and job satis_ed^ while internal type Bs are relaxed\ quiet people\ unexpressive\ somewhat submissive\ content and {mentally| and {physically| healthy[ It is the external Type As that seem more hostile\ competitive\ expressive\ dominant\ but feel threatened and unable to control the forces that lead to health and satisfaction and external Bs who may be either tense and over controlled or hopeless and helpless\ that have problems[ These results are partly in contrast to our previous studies[ Where signi_cant di}erences were found between the four groups in terms of self!reported stress[ Kirkcaldy et al[ "0883# found Type A internals did reveal signi_cantly lower stress scores with respect to such variables as {stress due
121
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
to intrinsic factors of the job| and {relationships with other people|[ Further\ Kirkcaldy et al[ "0882# found {internals| expressed signi_cantly less stress about intrinsic aspects of the job\ or`anizational structure "e[g[ lack of consultation and communication# and the home!work interface "e[g[ taking my work home#[ Also Sadri et al[ "0885# reported locus of control as the strongest single predictor of job stress [ [ [ external locus of control indicated a higher incidence of workplace stressors[ On the other hand\ the knowledge that neither Type A nor locus of control had any impact on perceived job stress in this study\ then suggests that whatever other di}erences emerged in other outcome variables "dissatisfaction and illness# this cannot be attributable to di}erences inherent in stress levels[ It was noteworthy that di}erences in U[K[ and German managers emerged here[ More speci_! cally\ the typology was related to mental and physical health in the British sample\ but not the German sample[ This is\ perhaps\ a _nding speci_c to private sector management[ Di}erences maybe a consequence of response style\ sampling di}erences or actual national di}erence[ We had no reason to assume there would be any di}erences and that the results would replicate[ It would be both naive and wrong to believe that personality factors are the only\ or indeed the primary factors that relate to mental and physical health[ The social context of the individual\ particularly social class\ has a considerable e}ect on health[ There are a plethora of studies in the sociology of health literature that demonstrate how sociological variables relate to both physical and mental health "Marmot\ 0871^ Eyer\ 0871^ Chernin\ 0870^ Siegrist\ 0879#[ The personality variables examined in this study may be seen as both a part determinant and consequence of various sociological factors like social class[ Thus\ external locus of control can be associated with lower socio!economic status but may just as much be a consequence as a cause of it\ because of the relative helplessness and powerlessness of people in working class jobs[ These results have important implications for research and practice[ Certainly they suggest that when examining correlates and consequences of Type A behaviour\ it is important to take into account locus of control beliefs[ Also the relationships between desire for and locus of control\ merits attention and it could be that these two factors also interact[ It may well be as Friedman et al[ "0874# note that it is not that Type A behaviours and beliefs are maladaptive on their own\ but in association with other beliefs like external locus of control\ that they lead to illness[ From an applied point of view\ any employee "and employer# would desire a relatively stress! free\ job!satis_ed\ psychologically and physically healthy work force[ Managerial sta} who perceive their work as particularly stressful and report inferior mental and physical health "i[e[ competitive and achievement!oriented Type A persons# should be o}ered on!site counselling aimed at enhanc! ing their perceived self!control[ But from the organizations point of view\ prevention should be more important than treatment\ which should encourage them to consider regular stress audits "Cooper\ 0885#[ From a research point of view\ there are inadequacies in using self!report measures of health[ By dichotomising the subjects at the median would appear a questionable method for categorising subjects\ since these characteristics are being measured along a continuum[ That is\ many of the subjects are possibly in the neutral zone between two extremes[ Instead\ it may be preferable in future studies "from previous research on the constructs# to identify what scores are empirically indicative of Type A vs B and internal vs external locus of control[ Type A:B is a multidimensional construct "Kirkcaldy et al[\ 0883# and life hostility dimensions have been consistently associated with health in the literature[ Since the Type A self!report measure of the OSI does not contain such
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
122
a subcomponent "2 subcomponents are {attitude to living|\ {style of behaviour| and {ambition|#\ this feature is likely to go unnoticed\ that is\ if we {screen| out the hostility larger components\ no relationship will be found[ Another limitation is the sole!reliance on a single\ self!report instrument and the cross!cultural nature of the study[ The results nevertheless are consistent with other studies such as Kirkcaldy et al[ "0882#\ in which the impact of locus of control was demonstrated in a working context[ A note of caution is warranted\ however\ since although physical health and physical symptoms are related "Kirkcaldy and Cooper\ 0881#\ the relationship is far from perfect[ It has demonstrated that the most physically symptomatic patients in medical settings are somaticising individuals whose problem is depression\ anxiety or some other form of emotional distress "Katon et al[\ 0877^ Ketterer\ 0881^ Mayou\ 0878#[
References Barefoot\ J[ C[\ Dahlstrom\ W[ G[\ + Williams\ R[ B[ "0872#[ Hostility\ CHD\ incidence and total mortality] A 14!year follow!up study of 144 physicians[ Psychosomatic Medicine\ 34\ 48Ð52[ Burke\ R[\ "0877#[ Type A behaviour\ occupational and life demands\ satisfaction and well being[ Psycholo`ical Reports\ 52\ 340Ð347[ Burke\ R[\ + Deszca\ E[ "0871#[ Career success and personal failure experiences and Type A behaviour[ Journal of Or`anizational Behavior\ 73\ 65Ð68[ Chernin\ K[ "0870#[ Womanize] The Tyranny of Slenderness[ London] The Women Press[ Chesney\ M[ A[\ + Rosenman\ R[ H[ "0879#[ Type A behaviour in the work setting[ In C[ L[ Cooper and R[ Payne "Eds#\ Current Concerns in Occupational Stress[ Chichester] John Wiley and Sons[ Chusmir\ L[\ + Hood\ J[ "0877#[ Predictive characteristics of type A behaviour\ among working men and women[ Journal of Applied Social Psycholo`y\ 07\ 577Ð587[ Cooper\ C[ L[ "0885#[ Handbook of Stress\ Medicine and Health[ Florida] CRC Press[ Cooper\ C[ L[\ + Payne\ R[ "0880#[ Personality and Stress[ Chichester] John Wiley and Sons[ Cooper\ C[ L[\ Sloan\ S[\ + Williams\ S[ "0877#[ Occupational Stress Indicator Manual[ Windsor] NFER!Nelson[ Eyer\ J[ "0871#[ Changing trends in ischemic heart disease] Relations to cohort experience and economic trends in industrial countries[ Advances in Cardiolo`y\ 18\ 49Ð44[ Feather\ N[\ + Volkmer\ R[ "0877#[ Preference for situations involving e}ort\ time pressure and feedback in relation to Type A behaviour locus of control and text anxiety[ Journal of Personality and Social Psycholo`y\ 44\ 155Ð160[ Friedman\ H[\ + Booth!Kewley\ S[ "0877#[ Validity of the Type A construct] a response[ Psycholo`ical Bulletin\ 093\ 270Ð273[ Friedman\ H[\ Hall\ J[\ + Harris\ M[ "0874#[ Type A behaviour\ nonverbal expressive style and health[ Journal of Personality and Social Psycholo`y\ 37\ 0188Ð0204[ Friedman\ H[\ + Rosenman\ R[ "0863#[ Type A Behaviour and Your Heart[ New York] Knopf[ Frost\ T[\ + Wilson\ H[ "0872#[ E}ects of locus of control and A!B personality type on job satisfaction within the health care _eld[ Psycholo`ical Reports\ 42\ 228Ð394[ Furnham\ A[ "0872#[ The A type behaviour pattern\ mental health and health locus of control beliefs[ Social Science and Medicine\ 06\ 0458Ð0461[ Furnham\ A[\ + Bochner\ S[ "0875#[ Culture Shock[ London] Methuen[ Furnham\ A[\ + Drakeley\ R[ "0882#[ Work locus of control and perceived organizational climate[ European Work and Or`anizational Psycholo`ist\ 2\ 0Ð8[ Furnham\ A[\ Hillard\ A[\ + Brewin\ C[ "0874#[ Type A behaviour pattern and attributes of responsibility[ Motivation and Emotion\ 8\ 28Ð40[ Furnham\ A[\ + Steele\ H[ "0882#[ Measuring locus of control] A critique of general children|s health and work!related locus of control questionnaires[ British Journal of Psycholo`y\ 73\ 332Ð368[
123
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
Fusilier\ M[ R[\ Ganster\ D[ C[\ + Mayes\ B[ T[ "0876#[ E}ects of social support\ role stress and locus of control on health[ Journal of Mana`ement\ 02\ 76Ð87[ Heilbrum\ A[\ + Friedberg\ E[ "0876#[ Type A behaviour and stress in college males[ Journal of Personality Assessment\ 40\ 444Ð453[ Howard\ J[ H[\ Cunningham\ D[ A[\ + Rechniker\ B[ A[ "0865#[ Health patterns associated with Type A behaviour] A managerial population[ Journal of Human Stress\ 1\ 13Ð20[ Katon\ W[\ Hall\ M[ L[\ Russo\ J[\ Cormier\ L[\ Holli_eld\ M[\ Vitaliano\ P[ P[\ + Beitman\ D[ "0877#[ Chest pain] relationship of psychiatric illness to coronary arteriographic results[ American Journal of Medicine\ 73\ 0Ð8[ Ketterer\ M[ W[ "0881#[ Denial speci_c to Friedman|s pathogenic emotions in Jenkins activity survey type A and angiography!referred males[ Psychosomatic\ 22\ 61Ð79[ Kirkcaldy\ B[ "0878#[ Dominant or submissive] A reply to Ray[ Personality and Individual Differences\ 09\ 0208Ð0211[ Kirkcaldy\ B[ "0884#[ Work stress and health in a sample of U[S[ police[ Psycholo`ical Reports\ 65\ 699Ð691[ Kirkcaldy\ B[\ + Cooper\ C[ L[ "0881#[ Managing the stress of change] Occupational stress among senior police o.cers in Berlin[ Stress Medicine\ 7\ 108Ð120[ Kirkcaldy\ B[\ Cooper\ C[ L[\ Furnham\ A[\ + Brown\ J[ I[ "0882#[ Personality\ job satisfaction and well being among senior public!sector "police# managers[ European Journal of Applied Psycholo`y\ 32\ 130Ð137[ Kirkcaldy\ B[ D[\ Furnham\ A[\ + Cooper\ C[ L[ "0883#[ Police personality\ job satisfaction and health[ Studia Psych! olo`ica\ 25\ 44Ð52[ Kroll\ W[\ + Crenshaw\ W[ "0857#[ Multivariate personality pro_le analysis of four athletic groups[ In G[ S[ Kenyon "Ed[#\ Proceedin`s of Second International Con`ress of Sport Psycholo`y\ "pp[ 86Ð095#[ Athletic Institute\ Chicago[ Lawler\ K[\ Schmier\ L[\ Armstead\ C[\ + Lacy\ J[ "0889#[ Type A behaviour\ desire for control and cardiovascular reactivity in young adult women[ Journal of Social Behavior and Personality\ 1\ 024Ð047[ Leikin\ L[ "0889#[ Type A behaviour and health locus of control[ British Journal of Medical Psycholo`y\ 52\ 70Ð73[ Marmot\ M[ G[ "0871#[ Socio!economic and cultural factors in ischemic heart disease[ Advances in Cardiolo`y\ 18\ 57Ð 65[ Materson\ M[\ Ivancevich\ J[\ + Smith\ S[ "0873#[ Relation of type A behaviour to performance and satisfaction among sales personnel[ Journal of Vocational Behaviour\ 14\ 192Ð103[ Mayou\ R[ "0878#[ A typical chest pain[ Journal of Psychosomatic Research\ 22\ 282Ð395[ Newton\ T[\ + Keenan\ A[ "0889#[ The moderating e}ect of type A behaviour pattern and locus of control upon the relationship change in job demands and change in psychological strain[ Human Relations\ 32\ 0118Ð0144[ Nowack\ K[\ + Sassenrath\ J[ "0879#[ Coronary!prone behaviour\ locus of control and anxiety[ Psycholo`ical Reports\ 36\ 248Ð258[ O|Brien\ G[ "0870#[ Locus of control\ work and retirement[ In H[ Lefcourt "Ed[#\ Research with the Locus of Control Construct\ "pp[ 6Ð61#[ New York] Academic Press[ Parkes\ K[ "0880#[ Locus of control as moderator] An explanation for addictive versus interactive _ndings in the demand*discretion model of work stress[ British Journal of Psycholo`y\ 71\ 180Ð201[ Paulhus\ D[\ + Christie\ R[ "0870#[ Spheres of control] An interactionism approach to assessment of perceived control[ In H[ Lefcourt "Ed[#\ Research with the Locus of Control Construct\ "pp[ 050Ð077#[ New York] Academic Press[ Perlo}\ K[\ Yarnold\ P[\ + Feltzer\ B[ "0877#[ Control theory and type A behaviour[ British Journal of Medical Psycholo`y\ 50\ 25Ð257[ Perry\ R[\ + Tunna\ K[ "0877#[ Perceived control\ type A:B behaviours and quality of instruction[ Journal of Educational Psycholo`y\ 79\ 291Ð209[ Rees\ D[\ + Cooper\ C[ L[ "0880#[ A criterion oriented validation study of the OSI outcome measures[ Stress Medicine\ 6\ 014Ð016[ Robertson\ I[\ Cooper\ C[ L[\ + Williams\ S[ "0889#[ The validity of the Occupational Stress Indicator[ Work Stress\ 3\ 18Ð28[ Rotter\ J[ "0855#[ Generalized expectancies for internal vs external control reinforcement[ Psycholo`ical Mono`raphs\ 79\ "0\ Whole No[ 598#[ Sadri\ G[\ Marcoulides\ G[ A[\ Cooper\ C[ L[\ + Kirkcaldy\ B[ "0886#[ Testing a Model of Occupational Stress across di}erent Countries[ Journal of Business and Mana`ement\ 2\ 09Ð18[ Seeman\ M[\ + Seeman\ T[ "0872#[ Health behaviour and personal autonomy[ Journal of Health and Social Behaviour\ 13\ 033Ð059[
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
124
Shekelle\ R[\ Gale\ M[\ + Norusis\ P[ "0874#[ Type A behaviour and risk of recurrent coronary heart disease in the Aspirin Myocardial Infarction Study[ American Journal of Cardiolo`y\ 45\ 110Ð114[ Siegrist\ J[ "0879#[ Die Bedeutung von Lebenserignissen fur die Entstehung korperlicher und psychosomatischer Erk! rankungen[ Nervenarzt\ 40\ 202Ð219[ Spector\ P[ "0871#[ Behaviour in organisation as a function of employee|s locus of control[ Psycholo`ical Bulletin\ 80\ 371Ð386[ Spector\ P[ "0875#[ Perceived control by employees] A meta!analysis of studies concerning autonomy and participation at work[ Human Relations\ 00\ 0994Ð0905[ Spence\ J[\ Helmreich\ R[\ + Pred\ R[ "0876#[ Impatience vs achievement striving in the type A pattern[ Journal of Applied Psycholo`y\ 61\ 411Ð417[ Storms\ P[\ + Spector\ P[ "0876#[ Relationships of organizational frustration with reported behavioural reactions] The moderating e}ects of locus of control[ Journal of Occupational Psycholo`y\ 59\ 116Ð123[ Strickland\ B[ "0867#[ InternalÐExternal expectancies and health!related behaviour[ Journal of Consultin` and Clinical Psycholo`y\ 5\ 0081Ð0100[ Strube\ M[\ Lott\ C[\ Heilizer\ R[\ + Gregg\ B[ "0875#[ Type A behaviour pattern and the judgement of control[ Journal of Personality and Social Psycholo`y\ 49\ 392Ð301[ Volkmer\ R[\ + Feather\ N[ "0880#[ Relations between type A scores internal locus of control and test scores[ Personality and Individual Differences\ 01\ 194Ð198[ Ward\ M[\ Chesney\ M[\ Swan\ G[\ Black\ G[\ Parker\ S[\ + Rosenman\ R[\ "0875#[ Cardiovascular responses in type A and type B men to a series of stressors[ Journal of Behavioural Medicine 99\ 999Ð999[ Wilkinson\ L[ "0877#[ SYSTAT] The System for Statistics[ Evanston\ II] Systat\ Inc[ Williams\ R[ S[\ Haney\ Less\ King\ Blumenthal\ J[ A[\ + Whalen\ "0879#[ Type A behavior\ hostility and coronary atherosclerosis[ Psychosomatic Medicine\ 31\ 428Ð438[
Personality and Individual Di}erences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
The relationship between type A\ internalityÐexternality\ emotional distress and perceived health B[ D[ Kirkcaldya\ \ C[ L Cooperb\ A[ F[ Furnhamc a
b
International Centre for the Study of Occupational and Mental Health\ Dusseldorf and Jena\ Germany Manchester School of Mana`ement\ University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technolo`y\ Manchester\ U[K[ c Business Psycholo`y Unit\ Department of Psycholo`y\ University Colle`e London\ U[K[ Received 29 June 0886
Abstract This study was based on 144 European managers| "German and British# responses to speci_c Occupational Stress Indicator scales "Cooper et al[\ 0877# and explored the impact of personality factors "Type A and locus of control# on subjectively perceived job stress\ satisfaction at work and physical and psychological health[ No signi_cant relationship was reported between personality\ work satisfaction and general health[ Overall\ Type A internals expressed the most job satisfaction with their work situation and better physical and psychological health\ although this was found signi_cant only for the sample of British managers[ Type A and B externals displayed higher mental illness scores\ whereas Type B externals only reported signi_cantly more physical symptoms "physical ill!health#[ Type B internals appear to report the best health[ Þ 0887 Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved[ Key words] Type A^ Locus of Control^ Health^ Stress
0[ Introduction Researchers have hypothesized a long list of individual di}erences and personality correlates of both occupational satisfaction and health "Kirkcaldy et al[\ 0882\ 0883^ Cooper and Payne\ 0880^ Burke\ 0877#[ It is generally assumed that these personality or cognitive traits moderate or mediate between occupational sources of stress and various job outcomes\ like satisfaction and health "Cooper\ 0885#[ This study set out to examine two moderator variables empirically] the Type A Behaviour
Corresponding author] Dr Bruce Kirkcaldy\ Psychological Institute\ Haydnstr[ 50\ 39482 Dusseldorf!Benrath\ Germany[ 9080Ð7758:87 ,*see front matter Þ 0887 Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved[ PII] S 9 0 8 0 Ð 7 7 5 8 " 8 7 # 9 9 9 3 6 Ð 5
113
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
Pattern and Locus of Control[ The concept of InternalÐExternal locus of control "LOC# owes its original conception to Rotter "0855#[ This theory asserts that individuals hold generalized expectancies\ based on past experience\ concerning the source of control of reinforcements in their environments[ These same individuals "internals# believe themselves responsible for and in control of\ their own destiny which can be in~uenced by their behaviour^ rewards are felt to be obtained through the exercise of personal e}ort and skills[ At the other extreme of this continuum are people who believe external factors\ such as fate\ luck or unpredictable events\ are beyond their own control and perceive little personal in~uence on the control of rewards and punishments[ The locus of control concept and measure has generated an enormous amount of interest "Furnham and Steele\ 0882# though there are those who have been critical of the internal:external distinction "O|Brien\ 0870#[ Type A behaviour has also witnessed much research in the _eld of clinical and health psychology[ For example\ working on the major determinants of heart attacks\ Friedman and Rosenman "0863# showed a signi_cant relationship between behavioural patterns of people and their prevalence to stress!related illness\ particular coronary heart disease[ They referred to this coronary!prone pattern as Type!A behaviour or {hurry sickness|[ It is characterized by a style of living which includes {extremes of competitiveness\ striving for achievement\ aggressiveness\ haste\ impatience\ restlessness\ explosiveness of speech\ tenseness of facial muscles and the feeling of being under pressure of time and under the challenge of responsibility|[ Like locus of control\ Type A is measured on a single dimension from Type B to Type A[ Research on the relationship between Type A and health\ speci_cally heart disease\ has been somewhat inconsistent "Shekelle et al[\ 0874#[ Several studies "Williams et al[\ 0879# have found that hostility\ a component of the Type A pattern\ is a better predictor of heart disease than measures of Type A[ Finally\ several studies "Barefoot et al[\ 0872# have demonstrated a strong relationship between hostility and death rates[ On the other hand\ Friedman and Booth!Kewley "0877# found that anxiety and depression were predictive of coronary heart disease "Kirkcaldy\ 0878#[ 0[0[ Type A\ job satisfaction and health There is a vast\ but equivocal literature in the Type A _eld looking at the relationship between this variable\ health and job satisfaction "Burke\ 0877^ Kirkcaldy and Cooper\ 0881^ Chesney and Rosenman\ 0879#[ There has been proli_c literature on the susceptibility to stress of Type As and concomitant illness "Heilbrum and Friedberg\ 0876^ Ward et al[\ 0875# as well as health[ Furnham "0872# found Type A had higher mental illness scores but more {internal| health locus of control belief than Type Bs[ Type As tended not to believe that their health was threatened and they had control over their health outcomes\ though the results did depend on the particular locus of control scale used[ Similarly\ Perlo} et al[ "0877# found Type As had higher internal health locus of control scales than Type Bs\ but Leikin "0889# failed to replicate this e}ect and argued that it is not belief about personal control that mediates in the di}erent health behaviours of As and Bs\ but rather the attributions they make to various symptoms[ Thus\ the literature on Type As and health is ambiguous "Kirkcaldy\ 0878#[ Many reports suggest that all Type As have poorer mental and physical health than Type Bs\ but results depend on the measures of both the independent and the dependent variables[
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
114
A number of articles have also looked at the relationship of Type A behaviour and job satis! faction\ though the results are also equivocal[ For instance\ Materson et al[ "0873# found no relationship between Type A scores and job satisfaction among sales personnel[ However\ Chusmir and Hood "0877# found that Type B behaviour was a signi_cant predictor of job satisfaction for both male and female working groups\ as did Kirkcaldy and Cooper "0881# in a study involving police managerial sta}[ Yet Howard et al[ "0866# assessed di}erences in overall satisfaction and found no relationship with Type A behaviour[ No doubt\ di}erent _ndings are due to the fact that studies are not strictly comparable in terms of subjects\ their jobs or\ indeed\ how Type A and job satisfaction is measured[ More importantly\ both concepts are multidimensional and it is quite possible that only some facets of job satisfaction are related to only some facets of Type A behaviour "e[g[ Satisfaction with {organizational processes| appears positively correlated with the cognitive components of Type A {attitude to living|\ the latter being less clearly related to sat! isfaction with {personal relationships| "Kirkcaldy et al[\ 0882#[ 0[1[ Locus of control\ job satisfaction Spector "0871#\ in a review article of the application of locus of control to organizational behaviour\ examined its relationship for such variables as satisfaction\ performance\ job perception\ motivational and supervisory style[ Internals generally display fewer psychological strains as a consequence of job speci_city and are less likely to respond to organizational frustration with aggression or withdrawal than are externals "Fusilier et al[\ 0876^ Storms and Spector\ 0875#[ Furnham and Drakeley "0882# found internals| locus of control was closely related to a positive perception of organizational climate\ particularly commitment and morale[ Spector "0871# found that internals are inclined to believe they may control work setting through their behaviour[ They are easier to motivate^ exhibit strong beliefs in their own competence^ perform better "as a result of greater e}ort\ seeking of more information in complex tasks and the exhibition of greater personal e}ectiveness#^ prefer a participative supervisory approach^ rely on personal persuasion from subordinates^ more task and less socially!oriented^ perceive less job strain^ exhibit more turnover in high dissatisfying jobs[ Externals tend to be more satis_ed with direct supervision^ show compliance with social demands and comply more with demands of coercive supervisors[ {{One further note is that internals seem to behave in ways that validate much theory in organizational psychology[ That is\ internals respond to reinforcement contingencies "incentive systems# on the job[ Externals on the other hand\ seem unresponsive to incentives "they want them but will not necessarily work hard for them# and prefer directive supervision[ Thus\ more organizational theory might well be limited to internals|| "p[ 384#[ In a very extensive review\ O|Brien "0870# tabulated and critically reviewed the extensive litera! ture on the relationship between locus of control beliefs and work[ Indeed he proposes four dimensions] internals "who believe in internal control across all situations#^ realists "whose beliefs vary as a function of the situation#^ structuralists "whose external belief stresses societal determinants of behaviour# and fatalists "who see all outcomes as dependent on luck\ fate and chance#[ Other reviewers have attested both to the popularity and the power of the locus of control concept but pointed out conceptual problems and measurement shortcomings "Furnham and Steele\ 0882#[
115
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
0[2[ A typology resulting from Type A and locus of control As shown above\ both Type A and locus of control have been shown to relate to occupational and health outcomes[ There is some evidence to suggest these variables are neither conceptually nor empirically overlapping[ Neither Frost and Wilson "0872#\ Feather and Volkmer "0877#\ Burke and Deszca "0871# nor Kirkcaldy and Cooper "0881# found the two measures correlated signi_cantly\ while Volkmer and Feather "0880# found locus of control to be signi_cantly positively correlated with some aspects of Type A "i[e[ achievement*striving#\ but negatively correlated with others "i[e[ impatience*irritability#[ Newton and Keenan "0889# looked at the moderating e}ects of both Type A and locus of control separately as predictors of job strain\ but neglected any study of their interaction[ There is some literature on the Type A behaviour and various aspects of control\ such as reaction to uncontrollable situations "Furnham et al[\ 0874#\ judgements of control "Strube et al[\ 0875# and perceived control "Perry and Tunna\ 0877#\ but less so on locus of control and Type A[ Over the years\ researchers have claimed that both the Type A "Spence et al[\ 0876# and the locus of control measures "Paulhus and Christie\ 0870# are multi!dimensional[ Thus\ Cooper et al[ "0877# adopted a 2!dimensional locus of control scale[ Friedman et al[ "0874# have distinguished between a healthy and unhealthy Type A and Type B[ Healthy As were talkative\ in control and charismatic\ unhealthy As repressed\ tense and illness!prone\ while healthy Bs were relaxed and quiet and unhealthy Bs submissive\ repressed and tense with external locus of control[ Although their 1×1 classi_cation was not based on locus of control beliefs\ the scale was used to validate the classi_cation[ This study is not an extension of the Friedman et al[ "0874# study\ which did not look at locus of control and Type A:B\ rather they examined expressiveness and Type A:B[ Expressiveness is a construct that has been shown to be unrelated "uncorrelated# with the locus of control[ "They may of course be parallel _ndings with the Friedman study if one assumes as did Friedman\ that Type A!externals are {healthy| as were Friedman|s Type A!expressive\ with Type B!internals:expressive being unhealthy[# Indeed\ the sort of methodology helps to unravel the many ambiguous _ndings in the Type A area[ This is not the _rst study to look at the interactive typology of the A:B behavioural pattern and locus of control[ Nowack and Sassenrath "0879# divided people into the four groups and looked at anxiety as the dependent variable[ As they predicted\ it was Type A\ external locus of control group who showed the highest test anxiety scores[ They believe it is the interaction of these two factors that is predictive of stress[ From the four!fold classi_cation of A:B and I:E quite clear types emerge "Kirkcaldy et al[\ 0882\ 0883#] "0# Type A externals] These are clearly deeply frustrated types\ because although competitive\ achievement!oriented\ aggressive and frenetic\ they believe this success is beyond their control^ either in the hands of fate or powerful others[ "1# Type A internals] Type A\ achievement orientation and competitiveness combined with intern! ality is likely to make these people relatively satis_ed*they believe that with e}ort and ability they can achieve what they want[ "2# Type B externals] These types are likely to feel rather helpless or hopeless\ and they are not competitive or achievement oriented\ possibly because they believe success in life is frequently a matter of chance or fate[
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
116
"3# Type B internals] These types are not particularly achievement oriented and striving\ yet have a strong feeling that they are in control in their lives[ As a result they are likely to be relaxed[ This typology does not attribute di}erent weights to the two variables] they contribute equally to the typology[ From the above typology several hypotheses were proposed[ First it was predicted that Type A internals would express least job stress\ most job satisfaction and report less psycho! logical and physical illness than the other three groups "particularly Type B externals#\ second it was predicted that Type A externals would experience most job stress\ least job satisfaction and report more illness\ ill!health with Type B internals having higher mental and physical health scores[
1[ Method 1[0[ Subjects The subjects used in the study were 144 managers from diverse British and German companies[ Two national groups were chosen to verify whether the e}ects were reproducible in di}erent countries[ The majority of the subjects were middle to senior managers[ There were 012 "37[13)# British and 021 "40[65)# German Ss[ The typical manager was likely to be of senior management\ male "76)#\ aged between 26 and 44 years "69)#\ married or in cohabitation "73)#\ with children "62)# and a university education "50)#[ 1[1[ Measures The Occupational Stress Indicator "OSI# "Cooper et al[\ 0877# was used\ which measured seven di}erent aspects of occupational stress[ This is a fairly well!known\ multi!dimensional\ self!report measure that attempts to measure not only sources or factors that lead to job stress but also job satisfaction and mental:physical health[ These subscales include three independent variable measures]Ð "a# sources of job stress "50 items#\ "b# Type A behaviour pattern "03 items#\ "c# locus of control "01 items#^ and three dependent variable measures\ "d# job satisfaction "11 items#\ "e# mental "07 items# and "f # physical health "01 items#[ Four of the OSI scales have subscales[ The sources of job stress is composed of six stress subscales] factors intrinsic to the job\ managerial role\ relationship with other people\ career and achievement\ organisational structure:climate and home] work interface^ high scores indicating high stress[ The Type A behaviour measure has three subscales and a total score^ they are {attitude to living|\ {style of behaviour| and {ambition|[ Note that this measure does not have an hostility subfactor[ In this study we used the total score because of the weaker internal reliability of the subscales[ High scores are classi_ed Type A\ low scores Type B[ The locus of control measure contains three subscales and a total score] {organizational forces|\ {management processes| and {individual in~uences| but the total score was used to codify the subject into internal or external[ The job satisfaction scale is composed of _ve subscales and a total score] {achievement value and growth|^ {the job itself|^ {organizational design and structure|^ {organization processes| and {personal relationships| "high scores indicate high satisfaction#[ The mental and physical health measures provide total scores only for each[ High scores indicate illness^
117
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
low scores health[ A detailed description of each of these subscales can be found in Cooper et al[ "0877#[ Reliability and normative data for the U[K[ is provided in Cooper et al[ "0877#\ with validity data in Robertson et al[ "0889# and Rees and Cooper "0880#[ The OSI was translated into German by a native speaking German psychologist and then back!translated into English by the _rst author[ Internal reliability coe.cients were computed for the six global scales "total job pressure\ Type A\ internal locus of control\ overall job satisfaction and health#[ For a German sample\ reliability coe.cients range from 9[49Ð9[89 "Kirkcaldy and Cooper\ 0881#\ with the mean reliability coe.cient for the scales being 9[62[ In addition\ demographic data was collected] gender\ age\ marital status\ number of children\ educational level\ and job tenure[ 1[2[ Procedure Ss completed the questionnaire in their own time and were not paid for participation but debriefed where possible and o}ered a free individualised case!report regarding their occupational stress pro_les "if requested#[ The British sample was drawn from managers attending management programmes at the Ashridge Management Centre\ U[K[ This pool of managers was drawn from a range of British companies at the upper middle to top management level\ as were the German managers "selected from management consultancy agencies\ management training centres and several large international _rms throughout Germany#[ These were a good representative sample of managers in the public and private sector and participants of the German equivalent of Ashridge GSW "Liblar#\ who run professional programmes for established managers[ The managers in the two countries were matched for age\ gender\ educational status and parenthood[
2[ Results 2[0[ Statistical analysis In order to analyse di}erences in stress pro_les between the distinct personality groups\ multiple discriminant analysis "MDA# was used[ A median!split was used to generate four groups\ per! formed for each nation separately\ apportioning subjects into one of four typologies[ Wilkinson "0877# describes classical discriminant function"s# as {{a special case of the general linear model\ this discriminant analysis treats it as a one!way multivariate analysis of variance||[ For instance\ in our study\ MDA was computed as a means of comparing the six stress subscales*or _ve job satisfaction subscales*simultaneously[ Such a multivariate technique possesses distinct advantages over reliance on an array of univariate analyses of each subscale:component[ It minimised the probability of making a type 0 error\ reducing multiple measures to a single major component\ by taking account of {{interrelationships between pro_le variables\ individual subject variance around group means on pro_le elements and group mean variability on the individual variables|| "Kroll and Crenshaw\ 0857#[ In addition to the pro_le multivariate statistic\ a series of univariate F!tests are computed for each of the subscales if the multivariate F was statistically signi_cant[
118
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
2[1[ National and demographic differences There were no national di}erences on either subscale or total score for Type A behaviour\ locus of control\ or physical health[ Germans reported slightly less job satisfaction on two of the _ve scales "job itself F 4[65\ P ³ 9[94 and organizational processes F 7[57\ P ³ 9[90#[ Also\ the German managers had healthier mental health scores[ Gender\ age\ educational level and job tenure di}erence were then examined across all subscales but multivariate "MANOVA# and univariate "ANOVA# analyses were non!signi_cant[ Although there were some signi_cant di}er! ences\ there were fewer than may be expected by chance\ hence these di}erences were not considered further[ 2[2[ Type A and locus of control Neither variable was related to the subjects| age\ education and gender[ In the German sample\ the two scales were marginally negatively correlated "r −9[00\ P ³ 9[94#\ while in the British the correlation was both positive and signi_cant "r 9[16\ P ³ 9[90#[ Thus\ it is externality and Type A that is positively correlated for the British samples\ but internality and Type A for the German sample[ When combined\ the correlation was near to zero "r 9[92#[ Table 1 also indicates the cell sizes for the four groups when both variables were split at the median\ the cell sizes were very even[ 2[3[ Type A:locus of control typology and job stress Any di}erences between the typology and both job satisfaction and health could easily be caused by di}erences in the experience of stress[ The OSI measures six job stressor factors and these were compared between the four di}erent types for each national groups[ Table 0 shows that no clear pattern emerged\ with only one of twelve separate factors being
Table 0 Means for sources of job stress and Type A:control typology British
German
Stress factor N
AE 15
AI 20
BE 24
BI 20
F Level
AE 20
AI 22
BE 23
BI 23
F Level
Intrinsic Managerial role Relationships Career Org structure Home:work
18[5 25[9 20[4 17[9 26[3 20[4
16[3 20[1 16[4 11[4 22[4 17[2
17[5 22[3 18[1 14[7 23[9 29[5
16[8 20[7 16[3 14[1 22[0 17[5
9[55 0[78 0[53 1[35 0[23 9[78
18[0 25[2 21[6 20[6 32[3 28[7
16[8 22[6 18[1 17[4 27[2 25[0
29[3 25[3 21[5 29[8 31[8 28[0
17[0 23[6 29[2 17[2 26[4 23[4
0[11 0[90 1[06 0[53 2[32 1[07
High scores indicate high stress[ P ³ 9[94[
129
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
Table 1 Means for job satisfaction and Type A:control typology British
German
Job satisfaction N
AE 15
AI 20
BE 24
BI 20
F Level
AE 20
AI 22
BE 23
BI 23
F Level
Achievement Job itself Org design Org processes Relationships
13[7 06[6 07[2 06[2 02[9
17[8 08[1 08[6 08[1 02[1
14[7 06[3 06[7 06[9 01[4
15[6 07[4 08[6 07[6 02[4
2[71 2[13 1[25 2[78 9[85
13[9 06[1 06[4 05[0 01[9
16[8 06[2 19[6 07[0 02[5
12[3 05[7 07[9 04[7 01[9
14[5 06[5 06[9 05[4 01[6
2[70 9[15 3[73 1[90 1[35
High scores indicate higher satisfaction[ P ³ 9[94^ P ³ 9[90[
signi_cant\ with the multivariate analysis being non!signi_cant "multivariate F 9[66 and F 0[93 for British and German samples respectively\ P × 9[94#[ Each MANOVA was across the four groups within country[ Hence the typology does not seem sensitive to job stress[ In other words\ di}erent types did not have di}erent levels of stress[ 2[4[ Typology and job satisfaction The overall multivariate analysis was statistically signi_cant "F"04\231# 1[56\ P ³ 9[90#[ A series of one!way ANOVA|s were then computed over the four types "for each culture#\ with job satisfaction[ Table 1 shows that for the British three of the _ve satisfaction factors with regards to {achieve! ment| "P ³ 9[90#\ {the job itself| "P ³ 9[94# and {organizational success| "P ³ 9[90# yielded sig! ni_cant di}erences[ The German data showed two signi_cant and one marginally signi_cant factor "{achievement| "P ³ 9[90# and {organizational design| "P ³ 9[90# and {personal relationships| "P ³ 9[09##[ Post hoc analyses\ however\ show a very clear pattern[ For each of the signi_cant factors that showed a signi_cant di}erence for both national groups\ the Type A internals expressed most satisfaction and the Type B externals least satisfaction[ This was equally true for the factors that reached a marginally signi_cant level or did not reach signi_cance[ 2[5[ Typology and health A one!way ANOVA was run\ across both national groups\ between the four types and mental and physical health "Table 2#[ For the British group only\ the various typologies signi_cantly predicted both health measures\ not only univariately but also multivariately F statistic "F"5\123# 2[08\ P ³ 9[90#[ For the sample of German managers\ the multivariate analysis of health pro_les was not signi_cant "F"5\141# 0[60\ P × 9[94#[ Post hoc analysis of variance showed both A and B externals appeared less mentally healthy than the internals\ particularly the type B internals[
120
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124 Table 2 Means of mental:physical health and Type A:control typology British
Mental health Physical health
German
AE
AI
BE
BI
F
AE
AI
BE
BI
F
45[1 12[9
37[7 17[9
43[5 29[3
32[3 13[9
4[79 2[45
36[8 29[4
31[7 15[3
37[4 17[4
31[8 14[0
1[53 1[91
High scores indicate illness^ low scores health[ P ³ 9[94^ P ³ 9[90[
3[ Discussion Following Kirkcaldy et al[ "0883# and Nowack and Sassenrath "0879#\ subjects from two cultural groups were ascribed into one of four categories depending on their Type A or locus of control scores[ Previous research would seem to indicate that Type A with external locus of control would be the most frustrated\ unhappy and poorly adapted "Kirkcaldy et al[ 0882\ 0883#[ Both variables "Type A and externality# individually appear to be related to work and life dissatisfaction and mental illness\ but in combination these e}ects are likely to be accentuated[ The results did\ indeed\ support this picture certainly with job satisfaction but not job stress[ It seems from the results that internality is most adaptive\ in that internal As had the lowest stress and highest job satisfaction scores\ while the internal Bs had the best psychological health scores[ The results may go some way to clarifying the equivocal Type A literature[ Many researchers have attempted to ascertain the unique characteristic in the Type A syndrome\ and many have been suggested\ such as hostility or desire for control "Strube et al[\ 0875#[ For instance\ in a study where they examined the 1×1 classi_cation in Types A and B individuals with high and low desire for control\ Lawler et al[ "0889# concluded] {{Desire for control is proposed as a coronary!prone component of the Type A behaviour pattern in women|| "p[ 024#[ This study suggests that it is not so much desire for control\ as locus of control\ which in interaction with other Type A characteristics may lead to frustration\ ill!health and unhappiness[ Whereas external locus of control beliefs seem associated with poor adaptation independent of whether associated with Type A or Type B\ internality in either type seems associated with good overall psychological adaptation[ Thus\ quoting from Friedman et al[ "0874#\ it seems that internal Type As are healthy {charismatic| types who are expressive\ dominant\ fast!moving but in control\ coping well\ sociable and job satis_ed^ while internal type Bs are relaxed\ quiet people\ unexpressive\ somewhat submissive\ content and {mentally| and {physically| healthy[ It is the external Type As that seem more hostile\ competitive\ expressive\ dominant\ but feel threatened and unable to control the forces that lead to health and satisfaction and external Bs who may be either tense and over controlled or hopeless and helpless\ that have problems[ These results are partly in contrast to our previous studies[ Where signi_cant di}erences were found between the four groups in terms of self!reported stress[ Kirkcaldy et al[ "0883# found Type A internals did reveal signi_cantly lower stress scores with respect to such variables as {stress due
121
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
to intrinsic factors of the job| and {relationships with other people|[ Further\ Kirkcaldy et al[ "0882# found {internals| expressed signi_cantly less stress about intrinsic aspects of the job\ or`anizational structure "e[g[ lack of consultation and communication# and the home!work interface "e[g[ taking my work home#[ Also Sadri et al[ "0885# reported locus of control as the strongest single predictor of job stress [ [ [ external locus of control indicated a higher incidence of workplace stressors[ On the other hand\ the knowledge that neither Type A nor locus of control had any impact on perceived job stress in this study\ then suggests that whatever other di}erences emerged in other outcome variables "dissatisfaction and illness# this cannot be attributable to di}erences inherent in stress levels[ It was noteworthy that di}erences in U[K[ and German managers emerged here[ More speci_! cally\ the typology was related to mental and physical health in the British sample\ but not the German sample[ This is\ perhaps\ a _nding speci_c to private sector management[ Di}erences maybe a consequence of response style\ sampling di}erences or actual national di}erence[ We had no reason to assume there would be any di}erences and that the results would replicate[ It would be both naive and wrong to believe that personality factors are the only\ or indeed the primary factors that relate to mental and physical health[ The social context of the individual\ particularly social class\ has a considerable e}ect on health[ There are a plethora of studies in the sociology of health literature that demonstrate how sociological variables relate to both physical and mental health "Marmot\ 0871^ Eyer\ 0871^ Chernin\ 0870^ Siegrist\ 0879#[ The personality variables examined in this study may be seen as both a part determinant and consequence of various sociological factors like social class[ Thus\ external locus of control can be associated with lower socio!economic status but may just as much be a consequence as a cause of it\ because of the relative helplessness and powerlessness of people in working class jobs[ These results have important implications for research and practice[ Certainly they suggest that when examining correlates and consequences of Type A behaviour\ it is important to take into account locus of control beliefs[ Also the relationships between desire for and locus of control\ merits attention and it could be that these two factors also interact[ It may well be as Friedman et al[ "0874# note that it is not that Type A behaviours and beliefs are maladaptive on their own\ but in association with other beliefs like external locus of control\ that they lead to illness[ From an applied point of view\ any employee "and employer# would desire a relatively stress! free\ job!satis_ed\ psychologically and physically healthy work force[ Managerial sta} who perceive their work as particularly stressful and report inferior mental and physical health "i[e[ competitive and achievement!oriented Type A persons# should be o}ered on!site counselling aimed at enhanc! ing their perceived self!control[ But from the organizations point of view\ prevention should be more important than treatment\ which should encourage them to consider regular stress audits "Cooper\ 0885#[ From a research point of view\ there are inadequacies in using self!report measures of health[ By dichotomising the subjects at the median would appear a questionable method for categorising subjects\ since these characteristics are being measured along a continuum[ That is\ many of the subjects are possibly in the neutral zone between two extremes[ Instead\ it may be preferable in future studies "from previous research on the constructs# to identify what scores are empirically indicative of Type A vs B and internal vs external locus of control[ Type A:B is a multidimensional construct "Kirkcaldy et al[\ 0883# and life hostility dimensions have been consistently associated with health in the literature[ Since the Type A self!report measure of the OSI does not contain such
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
122
a subcomponent "2 subcomponents are {attitude to living|\ {style of behaviour| and {ambition|#\ this feature is likely to go unnoticed\ that is\ if we {screen| out the hostility larger components\ no relationship will be found[ Another limitation is the sole!reliance on a single\ self!report instrument and the cross!cultural nature of the study[ The results nevertheless are consistent with other studies such as Kirkcaldy et al[ "0882#\ in which the impact of locus of control was demonstrated in a working context[ A note of caution is warranted\ however\ since although physical health and physical symptoms are related "Kirkcaldy and Cooper\ 0881#\ the relationship is far from perfect[ It has demonstrated that the most physically symptomatic patients in medical settings are somaticising individuals whose problem is depression\ anxiety or some other form of emotional distress "Katon et al[\ 0877^ Ketterer\ 0881^ Mayou\ 0878#[
References Barefoot\ J[ C[\ Dahlstrom\ W[ G[\ + Williams\ R[ B[ "0872#[ Hostility\ CHD\ incidence and total mortality] A 14!year follow!up study of 144 physicians[ Psychosomatic Medicine\ 34\ 48Ð52[ Burke\ R[\ "0877#[ Type A behaviour\ occupational and life demands\ satisfaction and well being[ Psycholo`ical Reports\ 52\ 340Ð347[ Burke\ R[\ + Deszca\ E[ "0871#[ Career success and personal failure experiences and Type A behaviour[ Journal of Or`anizational Behavior\ 73\ 65Ð68[ Chernin\ K[ "0870#[ Womanize] The Tyranny of Slenderness[ London] The Women Press[ Chesney\ M[ A[\ + Rosenman\ R[ H[ "0879#[ Type A behaviour in the work setting[ In C[ L[ Cooper and R[ Payne "Eds#\ Current Concerns in Occupational Stress[ Chichester] John Wiley and Sons[ Chusmir\ L[\ + Hood\ J[ "0877#[ Predictive characteristics of type A behaviour\ among working men and women[ Journal of Applied Social Psycholo`y\ 07\ 577Ð587[ Cooper\ C[ L[ "0885#[ Handbook of Stress\ Medicine and Health[ Florida] CRC Press[ Cooper\ C[ L[\ + Payne\ R[ "0880#[ Personality and Stress[ Chichester] John Wiley and Sons[ Cooper\ C[ L[\ Sloan\ S[\ + Williams\ S[ "0877#[ Occupational Stress Indicator Manual[ Windsor] NFER!Nelson[ Eyer\ J[ "0871#[ Changing trends in ischemic heart disease] Relations to cohort experience and economic trends in industrial countries[ Advances in Cardiolo`y\ 18\ 49Ð44[ Feather\ N[\ + Volkmer\ R[ "0877#[ Preference for situations involving e}ort\ time pressure and feedback in relation to Type A behaviour locus of control and text anxiety[ Journal of Personality and Social Psycholo`y\ 44\ 155Ð160[ Friedman\ H[\ + Booth!Kewley\ S[ "0877#[ Validity of the Type A construct] a response[ Psycholo`ical Bulletin\ 093\ 270Ð273[ Friedman\ H[\ Hall\ J[\ + Harris\ M[ "0874#[ Type A behaviour\ nonverbal expressive style and health[ Journal of Personality and Social Psycholo`y\ 37\ 0188Ð0204[ Friedman\ H[\ + Rosenman\ R[ "0863#[ Type A Behaviour and Your Heart[ New York] Knopf[ Frost\ T[\ + Wilson\ H[ "0872#[ E}ects of locus of control and A!B personality type on job satisfaction within the health care _eld[ Psycholo`ical Reports\ 42\ 228Ð394[ Furnham\ A[ "0872#[ The A type behaviour pattern\ mental health and health locus of control beliefs[ Social Science and Medicine\ 06\ 0458Ð0461[ Furnham\ A[\ + Bochner\ S[ "0875#[ Culture Shock[ London] Methuen[ Furnham\ A[\ + Drakeley\ R[ "0882#[ Work locus of control and perceived organizational climate[ European Work and Or`anizational Psycholo`ist\ 2\ 0Ð8[ Furnham\ A[\ Hillard\ A[\ + Brewin\ C[ "0874#[ Type A behaviour pattern and attributes of responsibility[ Motivation and Emotion\ 8\ 28Ð40[ Furnham\ A[\ + Steele\ H[ "0882#[ Measuring locus of control] A critique of general children|s health and work!related locus of control questionnaires[ British Journal of Psycholo`y\ 73\ 332Ð368[
123
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
Fusilier\ M[ R[\ Ganster\ D[ C[\ + Mayes\ B[ T[ "0876#[ E}ects of social support\ role stress and locus of control on health[ Journal of Mana`ement\ 02\ 76Ð87[ Heilbrum\ A[\ + Friedberg\ E[ "0876#[ Type A behaviour and stress in college males[ Journal of Personality Assessment\ 40\ 444Ð453[ Howard\ J[ H[\ Cunningham\ D[ A[\ + Rechniker\ B[ A[ "0865#[ Health patterns associated with Type A behaviour] A managerial population[ Journal of Human Stress\ 1\ 13Ð20[ Katon\ W[\ Hall\ M[ L[\ Russo\ J[\ Cormier\ L[\ Holli_eld\ M[\ Vitaliano\ P[ P[\ + Beitman\ D[ "0877#[ Chest pain] relationship of psychiatric illness to coronary arteriographic results[ American Journal of Medicine\ 73\ 0Ð8[ Ketterer\ M[ W[ "0881#[ Denial speci_c to Friedman|s pathogenic emotions in Jenkins activity survey type A and angiography!referred males[ Psychosomatic\ 22\ 61Ð79[ Kirkcaldy\ B[ "0878#[ Dominant or submissive] A reply to Ray[ Personality and Individual Differences\ 09\ 0208Ð0211[ Kirkcaldy\ B[ "0884#[ Work stress and health in a sample of U[S[ police[ Psycholo`ical Reports\ 65\ 699Ð691[ Kirkcaldy\ B[\ + Cooper\ C[ L[ "0881#[ Managing the stress of change] Occupational stress among senior police o.cers in Berlin[ Stress Medicine\ 7\ 108Ð120[ Kirkcaldy\ B[\ Cooper\ C[ L[\ Furnham\ A[\ + Brown\ J[ I[ "0882#[ Personality\ job satisfaction and well being among senior public!sector "police# managers[ European Journal of Applied Psycholo`y\ 32\ 130Ð137[ Kirkcaldy\ B[ D[\ Furnham\ A[\ + Cooper\ C[ L[ "0883#[ Police personality\ job satisfaction and health[ Studia Psych! olo`ica\ 25\ 44Ð52[ Kroll\ W[\ + Crenshaw\ W[ "0857#[ Multivariate personality pro_le analysis of four athletic groups[ In G[ S[ Kenyon "Ed[#\ Proceedin`s of Second International Con`ress of Sport Psycholo`y\ "pp[ 86Ð095#[ Athletic Institute\ Chicago[ Lawler\ K[\ Schmier\ L[\ Armstead\ C[\ + Lacy\ J[ "0889#[ Type A behaviour\ desire for control and cardiovascular reactivity in young adult women[ Journal of Social Behavior and Personality\ 1\ 024Ð047[ Leikin\ L[ "0889#[ Type A behaviour and health locus of control[ British Journal of Medical Psycholo`y\ 52\ 70Ð73[ Marmot\ M[ G[ "0871#[ Socio!economic and cultural factors in ischemic heart disease[ Advances in Cardiolo`y\ 18\ 57Ð 65[ Materson\ M[\ Ivancevich\ J[\ + Smith\ S[ "0873#[ Relation of type A behaviour to performance and satisfaction among sales personnel[ Journal of Vocational Behaviour\ 14\ 192Ð103[ Mayou\ R[ "0878#[ A typical chest pain[ Journal of Psychosomatic Research\ 22\ 282Ð395[ Newton\ T[\ + Keenan\ A[ "0889#[ The moderating e}ect of type A behaviour pattern and locus of control upon the relationship change in job demands and change in psychological strain[ Human Relations\ 32\ 0118Ð0144[ Nowack\ K[\ + Sassenrath\ J[ "0879#[ Coronary!prone behaviour\ locus of control and anxiety[ Psycholo`ical Reports\ 36\ 248Ð258[ O|Brien\ G[ "0870#[ Locus of control\ work and retirement[ In H[ Lefcourt "Ed[#\ Research with the Locus of Control Construct\ "pp[ 6Ð61#[ New York] Academic Press[ Parkes\ K[ "0880#[ Locus of control as moderator] An explanation for addictive versus interactive _ndings in the demand*discretion model of work stress[ British Journal of Psycholo`y\ 71\ 180Ð201[ Paulhus\ D[\ + Christie\ R[ "0870#[ Spheres of control] An interactionism approach to assessment of perceived control[ In H[ Lefcourt "Ed[#\ Research with the Locus of Control Construct\ "pp[ 050Ð077#[ New York] Academic Press[ Perlo}\ K[\ Yarnold\ P[\ + Feltzer\ B[ "0877#[ Control theory and type A behaviour[ British Journal of Medical Psycholo`y\ 50\ 25Ð257[ Perry\ R[\ + Tunna\ K[ "0877#[ Perceived control\ type A:B behaviours and quality of instruction[ Journal of Educational Psycholo`y\ 79\ 291Ð209[ Rees\ D[\ + Cooper\ C[ L[ "0880#[ A criterion oriented validation study of the OSI outcome measures[ Stress Medicine\ 6\ 014Ð016[ Robertson\ I[\ Cooper\ C[ L[\ + Williams\ S[ "0889#[ The validity of the Occupational Stress Indicator[ Work Stress\ 3\ 18Ð28[ Rotter\ J[ "0855#[ Generalized expectancies for internal vs external control reinforcement[ Psycholo`ical Mono`raphs\ 79\ "0\ Whole No[ 598#[ Sadri\ G[\ Marcoulides\ G[ A[\ Cooper\ C[ L[\ + Kirkcaldy\ B[ "0886#[ Testing a Model of Occupational Stress across di}erent Countries[ Journal of Business and Mana`ement\ 2\ 09Ð18[ Seeman\ M[\ + Seeman\ T[ "0872#[ Health behaviour and personal autonomy[ Journal of Health and Social Behaviour\ 13\ 033Ð059[
B[D[ Kirkcaldy et al[:Personality and Individual Differences 15 "0888# 112Ð124
124
Shekelle\ R[\ Gale\ M[\ + Norusis\ P[ "0874#[ Type A behaviour and risk of recurrent coronary heart disease in the Aspirin Myocardial Infarction Study[ American Journal of Cardiolo`y\ 45\ 110Ð114[ Siegrist\ J[ "0879#[ Die Bedeutung von Lebenserignissen fur die Entstehung korperlicher und psychosomatischer Erk! rankungen[ Nervenarzt\ 40\ 202Ð219[ Spector\ P[ "0871#[ Behaviour in organisation as a function of employee|s locus of control[ Psycholo`ical Bulletin\ 80\ 371Ð386[ Spector\ P[ "0875#[ Perceived control by employees] A meta!analysis of studies concerning autonomy and participation at work[ Human Relations\ 00\ 0994Ð0905[ Spence\ J[\ Helmreich\ R[\ + Pred\ R[ "0876#[ Impatience vs achievement striving in the type A pattern[ Journal of Applied Psycholo`y\ 61\ 411Ð417[ Storms\ P[\ + Spector\ P[ "0876#[ Relationships of organizational frustration with reported behavioural reactions] The moderating e}ects of locus of control[ Journal of Occupational Psycholo`y\ 59\ 116Ð123[ Strickland\ B[ "0867#[ InternalÐExternal expectancies and health!related behaviour[ Journal of Consultin` and Clinical Psycholo`y\ 5\ 0081Ð0100[ Strube\ M[\ Lott\ C[\ Heilizer\ R[\ + Gregg\ B[ "0875#[ Type A behaviour pattern and the judgement of control[ Journal of Personality and Social Psycholo`y\ 49\ 392Ð301[ Volkmer\ R[\ + Feather\ N[ "0880#[ Relations between type A scores internal locus of control and test scores[ Personality and Individual Differences\ 01\ 194Ð198[ Ward\ M[\ Chesney\ M[\ Swan\ G[\ Black\ G[\ Parker\ S[\ + Rosenman\ R[\ "0875#[ Cardiovascular responses in type A and type B men to a series of stressors[ Journal of Behavioural Medicine 99\ 999Ð999[ Wilkinson\ L[ "0877#[ SYSTAT] The System for Statistics[ Evanston\ II] Systat\ Inc[ Williams\ R[ S[\ Haney\ Less\ King\ Blumenthal\ J[ A[\ + Whalen\ "0879#[ Type A behavior\ hostility and coronary atherosclerosis[ Psychosomatic Medicine\ 31\ 428Ð438[